Database system for facilitating comparison of related information stored in a distributed resource

ABSTRACT

A database system and application for facilitating comparison of data between manufacturing lines or other business processes which are geographically separated or distributed includes a storage arrangement in which data from remote locations is shadowed and can be updated as necessary only from remote locations. The Intersite Line Comparison system (ILC) also controls the invoking of other applications in a manner which is transparent to the user and dynamically builds data comparisons in desired formats under user-friendly, menu-driven control. Automatic data conversion, including tables of equivalent groups of operations at different sites is provided to facilitate meaningful comparison of data from different sites.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention generally relates to data processing systems and,more particularly, to systems for utilizing data from a plurality ofdata stores in a distributed data base.

2. Description of the Prior Art

Since the development of stored-program, general purpose digitalcomputers and the development of complex programs for processing largeamounts of data and management of large databases, a general goal of thefunction of such machines has been to increase the availability ofinformation to a user in a manner in which the operation of the machineto obtain the desired data does not detract from the assimilation of thedata by the operator. The achievement of this goal has been complicatedby the many programs which have been developed to efficiently capture,store, retrieve and process particular types of data. For instance,alpha-numeric data is typically handled on a character-by-characterbasis since a code of limited length is sufficient to specify virtuallyany character in use in the language of any culture. In contrast,graphic or pictorial data must be captured, stored, retrieved andprocessed in a manner which will allow reproduction at a high degree ofresolution, thus requiring much more data to correspond to the spacewhich might be otherwise occupied by an alphanumeric character. Further,even rudimentary operations on graphic data, such as positioning of animage is largely incompatible with the existence of text syntax andpredetermined character positions within a document or in a screenimage.

Even alphanumeric data, alone, can present formidable problems of formand context when it must be operated upon efficiently by differentapplications (e.g. programs). For instance, a word processor willgenerally articulate data in text strings whereas database programs willprovide for capture, storage and retrieval of data based on screenscontaining fields which are used to categorize data and thus avoidstorage of a repeated set of identifiers with the data. Spreadsheetsrequire yet a different format for efficient data storage andprocessing.

The above types of differences and others, which are necessary to theefficient operation of particular applications limit the efficiency withwhich data can be shared between those applications. While someconversion programs exist, they are time-consuming and, for that reason,are seldom invoked automatically other than for conversion of text filesto the format required for a particular, running, word processor programwhere the need for such conversion can be assumed upon the command forretrieval of the file.

Consider now, the problem presented by the use of computers to presentand manage the large amount of data necessary to monitor a complexoperation such as the operation of a manufacturing assembly line. Cost,price and profit projections will typically be handled by a spreadsheettype of program. Design information will be handled by text and graphicsapplications. Correspondence and documentation will be handled in textfiles. Procurement data and invoices may be handled as both text filesand database screens. Testing, quality control, production and similartypes of reports may involve all of the above types of data. It can bereadily understood that even with existing forms of machine managers,where a plurality of applications can be more easily invoked from menusand so-called window programs which facilitate multi-processing (e.g.simultaneous running of a plurality of programs between which the usercan switch), the necessary data for the efficient management of amanufacturing assembly line or the like is not optimally available.Neither can all possible desired combinations of data be madesimultaneously available to a user from different applications, each ofwhich is specific to the reporting of only some of the desired data,without large amounts of processing time for data conversion.

In recent years, both economic and political considerations have led toa trend among manufacturers to produce similar or identical products atdifferent, widely separated locations. Such a plurality of manufacturinglines must be optimally managed, just as single manufacturing lines mustbe, but with the additional requirement that the resulting products mustbe absolutely uniform (including quality standards) completelyinterchangeable and produced at approximately the same cost. In costconsiderations, materials procurement, labor costs and availability,distribution costs and design must be continually compared between sitesin order to maximize the efficiency of the combination of manufacturinglines and overall cost-effectiveness of the manufacturing effort for thecompany.

In the past, such communications have been done in forms which increasethe number of types of data which must be assimilated by the dataprocessor. In addition to the types of computer database informationwhich could be exchanged electronically and which still results indifficulties of processing and communication to the computer user, theexchange of design and manufacturing data between sites was often donein hard copy form, possibly enhanced by facsimile transmission and imagedata capture technology. Nevertheless, particularly in matters ofautomated testing, data was often reduced to hard copy form, transmittedby facsimile, courier or mail and then locally entered on a localdatabase. At least in part, this manual data entry constituted a form ofdata conversion to enable the more rapid accessing of the data by thedifferent applications which were called upon to process the same.However, such forms of data transmission and recapture in machine usableform caused irregular delays and made them subject to human error. Asidefrom introducing a reliability factor into the data which might resultin inconsistent evaluations of the same initial information, irregulardelays are particularly deleterious to efficient management of aplurality of manufacturing lines since current data, derived locally,might be compared with obsolete data from another location, leading toincorrect management decisions.

In addition to the above-noted difficulties presented by different typesof data which must be pulled together and coordinated to allow ameaningful comparison between manufacturing lines or other businessendeavors, it must be realized that it is unlikely that twomanufacturing lines, even if arranged to produce identical products,will be identical and exhibit a one-to-one correspondence betweenoperations. Therefore, in addition to amassing data reflecting theoperation of the manufacturing lines, the manager at each site mustcontinually determine the portions of the lines which are sufficientlyequivalent to allow comparison and what adjustments in data may benecessary for a meaningful comparison to be made. Thus, in the past,such equivalency determinations were subject to human judgement andmight be inconsistent between sites.

Further, it is difficult to accomplish the timely transmittal ofnecessary information consistent with the maintaining of the desireddegree of security since either transcription of data and electronictransmission of data may require particular measures to be taken inregard to such data transmittal. For instance, scrambling or encryptionmay De necessary for electronic transmission, depending on the degree ofsecurity required. By the same token, the use of couriers and personnelwith special clearances for data transcription may result in additionaldelays.

It should be understood that while these considerations and the problemswhich can result are particularly acute in manufacturing processes, thesame considerations and problems exist in many fields of endeavor, suchas in architecture, insurance, banking, transportation and the likewhich are subject to both economic and geographical influences.Therefore, although the invention will be described in terms ofgeographically distributed manufacturing lines, the applicability of theinvention is not so limited and should be considered applicable to anyother geographically distributed business endeavor.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide access toinformation used in the management of manufacturing lines or otherbusiness endeavors no matter how widely separated geographically.

It is another object of the invention to provide for comparison in realtime of data from all sites of a business endeavor at any single sitethereof and to accommodate different forms of transmission and differentlevels of access to maintain system security and integrity.

It is a further object of the invention to provide for comparison ofdata between sites and from the selective point of view of any sitebased on a uniform concordance of equivalent data, regardless of theidentity of individual operations at any site.

It is yet another object of the invention to provide for the automaticand user-transparent access to data in a plurality of applications andin a plurality of forms and formats for presentation in a user-definableformat for rapid assimilation thereof.

In order to satisfy the above and other objects of the invention, asystem is provided for comparing data from at least two data sourcesincluding a node of a network receiving data from at least one datasource and a shadow of data from another data source, means fordisplaying a menu of functions and selecting a function therefrom, meansresponsive a selection from the menu for invoking at least oneapplication at the node and reporting data through the application, andselectively displaying the data reported.

In accordance with another aspect of the invention, a method of dataretrieval is provided including the steps of storing a concordance ofequivalent data items included in data from at least a first source anda second source, retrieving selected data items corresponding to saidfirst source from a memory, and retrieving equivalent data itemscorresponding to said selected data items from said second source fromsaid memory in response to said concordance.

In accordance with a further aspect of the invention, a method of dataretrieval is provided in a system, including the steps of comparing alist of data items and a conversion table to detect predetermined typesof differences between the list of data items and the conversion table,and listing data items detected by the comparing step.

In accordance with a yet further aspect of the invention, a method ofdata retrieval from a virtual machine system including a distributedresource, said virtual machine system having a plurality of nodes, eachsaid node including a plurality of applications and local storage isprovided comprising the steps of storing selected data items from thedistributed resource in local storage including updating the localstorage when one of a plurality of predetermined files of thedistributed resource is altered, displaying a menu of predetermined datareporting options, selecting a data reporting option from said menu,invoking at least one application in response to selection of a datareporting option and selecting data from the local storage in responseto selection of a data reporting option, selecting further data fromlocal storage in response to the selection of data from said localstorage under control of a concordance of data items, and reporting thedata and the further data in a predetermined format corresponding toselection of a data reporting option from the menu.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The foregoing and other objects, aspects and advantages will be betterunderstood from the following detailed description of a preferredembodiment of the invention with reference to the drawings, in which:

FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the intersite line comparison system(ILC) according to the present invention in combination with an existingvirtual machine (VM) system,

FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of the database of the ILC systemaccording to the present invention,

FIGS. 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, 3f, 3g, 3h, 3i, 3j and 3k, together, form aflow chart illustrative of the operation of the present invention,

FIGS. 4 and 5 are screens illustrating the main menu of a preferred formof the invention,

FIG. 6 is a data comparison format menu according to the invention,

FIGS. 7 and 8 are two exemplary screens which may be reached from themenu of FIG. 6,

FIGS. 9, 10, 10a, 11, 12 and 12a are further exemplary screens useful inunderstanding the operation of the invention, and

FIGS. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 are alternative screens whichare exemplary of other screens which may be used at particular locationsof the ILC system.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF A PREFERRED EMBODIMENT OF THE INVENTION

Referring now to the drawings, and more particularly to FIG. 1, there isshown, in schematic form, the architecture of the present invention inrelation to an existing system. The invention is preferably implementedin connection with a virtual machine (VM) system including a network asgenerally indicated by a distributed resource. This distributed resourcetypically comprises storage which is distributed through a plurality ofnodes of the system. In a manner well-understood in the art, each nodecan send all or a portion of the storage at that node to another nodewhere a shadow of that data can be held for rapid access. The shadowdata can be updated as desired under control of either the owner node orthe node where the shadow exists. Therefore, the VM system can make eachuser terminal appear to contain the entire contents of the distributedresource.

In existing virtual machine systems, the user may invoke any one of aplurality of applications, as desired, which may be available locally orimported over the network. As illustrated, these applications mayinclude but are not limited to such applications as

VMSERVE--service machine

VMSERVEX--service machine

SCANFILE--used for searches

XEDIT--screen manager and macros

REXX--a programming language used in the invention

IOS3270--an input/output program

NEATWIND--a screen manager for producing windows

GDDM--used for graphics

GDDMREXX--a graphics interface for REXX

EZIMAGE--an image presentation controller

FCOMPARE--a comparison program

TOOLSRUN--service machine for updating ILC databases

TOOLCARE--used for synchronization of databases.

In a VM system, any one or more of these applications may be manually orautomatically invoked by a user and, when invoked, interact with thedistributed resource as shown by dotted lines in FIG. 1. A menu could beused for this purpose within the level of ordinary skill in the art.

The Intersite Line Comparison (ILC) system 10, according to theinvention, also uses menus but, in contrast to the prior art, uses menusto select particular predetermined functions which may, in turn,automatically invoke one or more of the noted applications, or otherapplications which may be provided or available, and thus interact withthem to provide enhancements thereof and cause them to automatically actin combination in some selected instances. Therefore, the ILC system,according to the invention operates much in the fashion of a separateprogram but operation is greatly simplified and improved in performancefor the purpose of data comparison by the ability to utilize existingapplications which are effectively contained within the ILC. Byautomatically invoking one or more applications and interaction withthese applications, which, in turn, interact with the distributedresource, the ILC can retrieve data in many predetermined and usefulforms from a combination of the applications available. The ILC systemcan thus provide ready access to data in a much simplified anduser-friendly manner.

More specifically, according to a preferred form of the invention, thefollowing functions are supported:

1.) Selecting any two sites from a list of sites and making a comparisonof the process flows of each site. A process flow consists of asequential list of operations and sectors. An operation is amanufacturing step used to produce a product and a sector is a groupingof logically related operations. The process flow comparison can compareidentical operations in each process flow. The process flow comparisoncan also compare groups of sectors and operations from each process flowthat accomplish the same objective. The number of sectors and operationsfrom one process flow need not be the same as the number of sectors andoperations of any other process flow. The sectors and operations betweenprocess flows need not be the same as or otherwise identified with thesectors and operations of any other process flow in any rigid orexplicit manner.

2.) Selecting any two sites from a list of sites and making a comparisonby individual sector or a dynamically defined group of sectors toprovide a comparison of substantially like items lined up side-by-side.

3.) Selecting any two sites from a list of sites and making a detailedside-by-side comparison of values from the two sites for a particularlist of items that describe an operation.

4.) Selecting any two sites from a list of sites and making a dynamiccomparison of a predetermined, logically defined group of sectors withvalues of like items in a predefined format.

5.) Selecting any two sites from a list of sites and making a comparisonof only values for operations in which a problem has been detected orotherwise indicated, based upon variance of operations or sectorsbetween sites. Characterizations of problems as open or resolved, majoror minor and previously or newly detected or indicated can bediscriminated.

6.) Comparisons can be made between historical data and may be for asingle site at two points in time or any point in time when a change hasoccurred or a two site comparison taken at one or two points in time.Most unchanged data is suppressed to more clearly indicate changed data.Some unchanged data is displayed to provide a reference to the user.

7.) More general comparisons can be made between any of a plurality ofsites where the data does not have like items or keys by specifying acategory of data and altering the site selection to sequentially displayvalues for each site even when there is no correlation betweenoperations or sectors at certain sites, such as for production yielddata for differing products.

Considering FIG. 1 in greater detail, a user at a terminal 12 at a node10 of the VM system can invoke any desired application in the usualmanner, as indicated by the dashed lines 14 of FIG. 1, or can invoke ILCdirectly, as indicated by solid lines 16, assuming appropriate access isgranted. The preferred system of granting access to particular users isdisclosed in detail in U.S. Pat. application Ser. No. 07/754,923, (IBMDocket No. F19-91-044) entitled FRONT END FOR FILE ACCESS CONTROLSYSTEM, filed concurrently herewith by the inventor named herein, andwhich is hereby fully incorporated by reference. The ILC responds with aplurality of menus, which can be simply produced as text screens (andwhich can be suitably limited in content to correspond to the accessauthorized to the user) from which the user can select a menu entrycorresponding to the desired data and data presentation. The menu ispreferably implemented in a selection hierarchy and the text screenswill preferably contain instruction prompts as well as allowing resortto help screens.

A selection from an ILC menu will either call a further menu screen froma selection hierarchy or tree of such screens, as will be explained ingreater detail below, or cause direct invocation of one or more of theapplications, such as 18, 18', available on the system. The invocationof applications from the menu to provide enhancements of theapplications, according to the invention, as well as the implementationof the menus may perhaps be best understood by detailing how suchinvocation of programs would be done according to a simple operatingsystem such as DOS. In the text screen, each menu selection is providedwith a unique number, although the same selection could be contained ina plurality of menu text screens. Each such unique number can then beused as the name of a batch file which will automatically execute uponthe entry of the number. Cursor selection of a menu item can be done byusing a cursor location input to look up a corresponding number from alook-up table. As is well-understood, the batch file thus called can beas simple or complex as desired to provide the desired function and cansequentially call a plurality of applications, call appropriate dataconversion routine, provide for temporary storage of data in a fileindependent of the application so that it can be used by a subsequentlyinvoked application or the ILC system, repeat the process, calling oneor more other applications, format the data returned for communicationto the user, and so forth, as desired, to correspond to any menuselection provided on the ILC system.

If desired, or appropriate, each of these "batch files" can beprogrammed in a manner which will be evident to those skilled in theart, in view of this disclosure, to provide for sequential execution ofa plurality or sequence of menu selections. This would be done, forinstance, where options would be provided for data presentation. In DOS,for example, it would be implemented by providing for display of asecond text screen and PAUSE command at an appropriate point in a first"batch file" in order to allow calling of a second (or subsequent)"batch file" which would then return to the first batch file afterexecution. Such options can also be implemented in a hierarchical ornested manner.

It should be understood that the actual programming, while explainedabove in a simplified form for purposes of clarity, will depend upon theparticular operating system used, such as UNIX™, AIX™, etc. and will beevident to those skilled in the art in view of the above description. Itmay also be helpful to conceptualize the menu selections as so-called"macro" subroutines which will dynamically build the data collection andscreen presentation for the particular data comparisons desired. Itshould also be evident from the above description that the ILC system,by providing selective processing with one or more of the applications18, 18' available on the system as well as additional processing asdesired, including data conversion and screen formatting, provides auser-friendly, menu-driven system for access to virtually anycombination of data available from the shared resource whether it is inthe form of text, database screens, line drawings (e.g. CAD), graphicsor pictorial data. This data is made available on-line by the ILC systemand virtually immediate response is provided to the user as will now beexplained.

Referring again to FIG. 1, it will be noted that the node 10 of thenetwork illustrated accesses both the shared resource 40 and a portionof an ILC database 30. The entire ILC database is illustrated in moredetail in FIG. 2. The database essentially comprises a plurality of sets30, 30', 30" of mini-disks containing data preferably organized bysubject matter for the purpose of facilitating implementation ofsecurity and user access to the ILC system, as disclosed in the aboveincorporated, concurrently filed application. The number of sets ofmini-disks will be equal to the number of nodes participating in the ILCsystem and each node will access only one of the sets (e.g. 30, alsoshown in FIG. 1) of mini-disks containing its own data and shadows ofdata from other sites. It should be noted, in this regard, that not allnodes of the VM system need to participate in the ILC system or have theILC system implemented thereon. In fact, in an implementation directedto management of a manufacturing assembly line, it is preferable thatonly the nodes at locations having manufacturing lines for similar orrelated products be participants in any single particular ILCimplementation. By the same token, if the same VM system serviceslocations where manufacturing lines exists for dissimilar products, eachgroup of locations in which the manufacturing lines are for similar orrelated products can have a separately implemented ILC system within thesame VM system.

The node illustrated in FIG. 1 will access only one of the sets ofmini-disks which, as shown in FIG. 2, will contain all current dataoriginating at that node which is to be accessed by the ILC system andshadows of similar data from the other nodes of the ILC system. Any nodecan, of course, write to its own files of the mini-disks but writing tothe shadow files is not permitted. The shadow files may be periodicallyupdated over the network from other nodes of the ILC system as may bedesired. Preferably, updates to the shadow files are made immediatelyupon alteration of each corresponding file of the master file for thatdata (e.g. at the site where the data originates). It should also benoted that, since this communication to form the shadow files is largelyindependent of user access to the mini-disks, subject to priority andarbitration protocols which may be present in the system, differentcommunication links with different security attributes can be easilyimplemented. Since the shadow files are available at any node only forread-only access, there is no danger of file corruption at any node andonly the latest version of any file will be supplied to any user unlesshistorical records are selected. Further, since read-only access neednot be an exclusive access state, many users may obtain simultaneousaccess to the shadow files, allowing rapid system response. There is noneed, therefore, to provide tags to the files to indicate alteration ofa file, as is done in METHOD FOR MANAGING AN ELECTRONIC MAIL BASKETSERVICE (IBM Docket No. AT9-88-036) by Heyen et al.

It should also be appreciated that the ILC system, according to theinvention, can accommodate any type of data and automatically provideappropriate conversions of groups of sectors and/or individualoperations where necessary between applications. Conversion of data 22,as used by different applications can be provided, as well. As shown inFIG. 1, the data conversion to a standard language and format issupplemented by a look-up table 24 which contains a concordance betweengroups of operations or sectors at each site to thus group data in apredetermined fashion to facilitate comparisons between sites. In orderto compare sectors and operations from one site to sectors andoperations from another site, the data must be in ILC format and aconversion means, such as a look up table, must be provided. Theconversion table identifies the groups of sectors and operations thatperform essentially the same function and the operations from each sitewhich are comparable between sites.

By the same token, the ILC system imposes no constraints on theoperations to be compared at any site or the form in which data iscollected, stored or manipulated in any particular application andessentially renders the various and possibly incompatible applicationstransparent to each other and to the user. It should also be noted thatthe number of mini-disks which may be utilized by the ILC system has noconstraint imposed thereon by the ILC system, itself. Therefore, thenumber of mini-disks and the organization thereof is limited only by thehardware capacity of the system and can be organized in any mannerconsistent with the desired security and access authorizationarrangements which may be provided. It has been found in practice that areasonably small number of approximately thirty mini-disks is sufficientto satisfy practically all applications. Likewise, the ILC system isindependent of the file access authorization system used. Preferably,however, file access is controlled by the known Resource Access ControlFacility (RACF), implemented with a front end arrangement as disclosedin the above incorporated, concurrently filed application.

Also, it should be noted that the types and organizations of the datawhich can be returned to the user by the ILC system is extremelyflexible and can be readily adapted to virtually any business process.As an example, according to a preferred implementation of the invention,for a manufacturing line such as for the manufacture of so-calledMulti-layer module (MLM) electronic circuits, particular applicationswill include

Yield/loss reports

Yield plans

Loss codes

Special projects reports

Documentation

Product Descriptions

Cycle time reports

M/E Family codes

Unused chip site locations

Process Chemicals

Engineering Change Status reports

CUSUM and/or SPC reports

Product Handling Requirements

T/F Process chemicals

Distortion Measurement programs and

DMIS-TF Measurement reports.

As can be seen, the appropriate data included in these applications isdiverse and yet can be accommodated by the ILC system in accordance withthe invention. For instance, while yield and loss reports may betypically in the form of database screens, as processed by theapplication, product descriptions, documentation and reports of unusedchip site locations are likely to contain text, line drawings andgraphics data.

The operation of the invention will now be described with reference to aplurality of exemplary screens utilized in a preferred embodimentthereof to provide a detailed understanding of the ILC system. In FIGS.3a-3k, there is shown a flow chart illustrating an exemplary form of theoperation of the ILC system according to the invention. FIGS. 3a-3k willbe referred to for context in the following description of preferredforms of display screens shown in FIGS. 4-12.

In FIG. 4, an initial screen of the ILC system is shown. The first lineof the screen identifies the ILC system which has been invoked and iscurrently running. The first line of the screen also identifies thesecurity level as "(SECURITY CLASSIFICATION)" A screen identificationnumber appears at the upper right. Next, below the first line, is aheader space which provides an instructional prompt to the user.Specifically, the user is prompted to enter a number corresponding to asite number and, optionally, a second site number. A cursor canpreferably be made to follow the blank spaces at the right side of eachcorresponding line of instructions as a further prompt to the user.Preferably, these categories and corresponding instructions are providedwithin the text of the menu in text lines bounded by asterisks. Also,preferably, the instructions and selections will be provided withdifferent color attributes which, incidentally, can be used to controlthe cursor image and limit selections by cursor to specific permittedselections. Color attributes may also be used as a security key to limitthe contents of the display in a manner which is well-understood. If thefirst two selection steps were to be implemented in the DOS batch fileexample referred to above or macro, the batch file or macro would merelydirect storage at a particular location which can be accessed by asubsequent routine.

In FIG. 3a, an initial portion of the ILC system is shown. When the ILCsystem is invoked, as can be done from any terminal of the system, amain menu (screen A00, FIG. 4) is displayed on the terminal screen, asshown at 101. This provides an initial process where the user enters theselection of one or two sites and an item on screen A00. The menu asksthe user to indicate a site, and optionally indicate a second site if acomparison is desired. An item must also be selected that is to bedisplayed or displayed and compared. An item refers to an item of datasuch as those listed under categories of yield/loss reports,process-flows, documentation, etc., as shown in the lower portion ofscreen A00, illustrated in FIG. 4. Any number of sites may be includedon this screen as well as any number of items. If the number of sitesand items exceed the number of lines on the physical terminal, the menucan be provided on a plurality of similar, sequential screens orscrolled. The user then makes selections which are entered 102 into thesystem. Following the entry of the identity of one or two sites for dataretrieval, the third line of the header of screen A00 instructs the userto select a particular item by number. This is also preferably enteredinto memory in the same manner as the site desired. Note that the secondinstruction line contains the text "(For More Items Press PF8)",informing the user of the identity of a key which will bring up a secondpage of the same menu as a text screen, shown in FIG. 5. The items whichcan be selected are preferably grouped into categories under headingswhich are preferably displayed in a further color. The items,themselves, may preferably include parenthetical indications of the dataavailable (e.g. for yield and loss reports, two types of reports areavailable but neither will reflect data from "Location 3", which, forthe sake of example, is assumed to be in the early stages ofimplementation of the ILC system. Similarly, the text screen menuindicates that yield comparisons are not available from "Location 4" andother data may only be available from single sites.

The numbers assigned to the location portion and the option portion ofthe menu selections need only be unique within each portion of the menu.Duplication of numbers between the location portion and the optionportion is therefore possible and the necessity of unique numbers withinthe option portion does not impose a constraint upon the alphanumericdesignation of the locations. If it is desired that menu selectionnumbers be duplicated, differentiation can be accomplished based on amenu portion. Alternately, an alphabetic entry (e.g. first letter of alocation name, an acronym or text, such as the location name, itself)can be used.

Finally on the last line of the text screen, keys are defined for helpscreens, quitting the program or advancing forward or backward througheach ILC menu. Since this line is consistent or only slightly modified,regardless of the text screen displayed, it will preferably be displayedin yet another color.

The items to be selected from the screen shown in FIG. 5 are preferablylogically divided into process flow and non-process flow categories. Thecategory is detected at decision block 103, which determines if the dataitem is a process flow consisting of operations and sectors which aregroups of operations or other data which is not to be compared. If anon-process flow category is selected, the ILC system branches to 104.In this case a menu of data is presented which corresponds to theselected site and the indicated data item. Individual data items can beselected from this menu and displayed. Afterward, a return is made tothe main menu via A9. If the selection had been a process flow, the ILCsystem branches to FIG. 5 and a menu of options will be shown asillustrated with screen A026, shown in FIG. 6. The site namescorresponding to the selected site numbers on screen A00 will beindicated on this menu. If there had been only one site selected, then acomparison could not be done and a modification of screen A026 would bepresented. This would consist of only line option 1 and line option 10.In this way, it is seen that the implementation of the ILC system may bean ongoing process which can grow to meet the needs of the line managersand others involved with the operation of the manufacturing lines.

Assuming, as shown in FIG. 4 or 5, that item 16 is selected (which is aprocess flow category item), a further menu at a different hierarchicallevel is displayed, as shown in FIG. 6. FIG. 6 contains a first linewhich continues to identify the ILC system and may indicates a higher orlower security level for the screen. A second line of instructionsindicates the permitted user action and a further header line indicatesthe identity of the item selection previously made. It should be notedthat this type of hierarchical menu display is, per se, well-known.However, in accordance with the invention, the menu options at thislevel of the hierarchy represent data presentation formats. Forinstance, in this case, the first two lines allow a single site's datato be displayed in the form of a process flow consisting of sectors andoperations. If an optional second site had been selected on screen A00(FIG. 4), then a single site's process flow would have ultimatelydisplayed the second site's operations data. When an operation isselected from the process flow, ILC checks the conversion table 24 tosee if there is a comparable operation or group of operations in thesecond site's process flow. If this is the case, each site's operationaldetails are then displayed side-by-side.

The next two pairs of menu selections provide for display of data fromtwo sites for comparison but also providing for formatting based on onesite and containing comparable data for the other specified site. This"point-of-view" feature of the invention is implemented by reference tothe concordance in the look-up table 24 or other storage arrangement andwhich may be developed in a manner which is unique to each node of thesystem. By reference to the concordance, the ILC at each nodeautomatically groups and possibly adjusts data retrieved from thatnode's portion of the ILC database in order to provide for a comparisonof substantially equivalent portions of the manufacturing line.

The following two lines display an operation cross-reference list fromeach site's point of view. This is a process flow that shows, next toeach operation of that site, the comparable operation of the other siteif that operation is comparable on a one-for-one basis. The next linedisplays a list of common operations that, although they have beenindicated on the conversion table to be common operations, do not havethe same titles. The different titles for each operation are listed. Thenext two lines show the operations from each site that are indicated inthe process flow but have not been listed in the conversion table. Thisprovides a way for an administrator of the system to keep the conversiontables updated. Finally, the last two lines provide for display of eachsite's unique history of the process flows.

The functions which may be selected by these three lines are achieved byaccessing a data item list which will preferably exist in a conversiontable and comparing the data items with the contents of the concordanceof data items from other sites contained in the conversion table.Preferably, the equivalence of data items is initially done manually. Ifequivalence has been specified, the function of line 7 of FIG. 6 can becarried out by a process which merely compares the titles of items whichhave been specified to be equivalents; reporting discrepancies forcorrection. If the function of lines 8 or 9 is selected, the list ofdata items for either of the selected sites is checked to determine ifan equivalent item for the other selected site has been specified to bean equivalent; reporting only those data items from the listcorresponding to the selected, specified site where no equivalency hasyet been specified at the other specified site.

In summary, the screen shown in FIG. 6 is used to lead to one of aplurality of other screens including the main menu, as shown by thebranch at 106 to A9 of FIG. 3a. It should also be noted that the usercan also return to the main menu from block 104 if a non-process flowcategory item selection had been made, as discussed above. However, themajor features of the ILC system, itself, are directed to allowing thecomparison of data between manufacturing sites or other geographicallyseparated business enterprises. If, for instance, at 105 of FIG. 3a("View Options List"), line 1 of the menu of FIG. 6 is selected, screenA01, shown in FIGS. 8 and 9 will be provided, whereas, if line 3 isselected, screen A036, shown in FIG. 7, will be provided, as will bediscussed below with regard to FIG. 3b since this selection from theoptions list of FIG. 6 at 105 of FIG. 3a, leads the ILC system to A1 ofFIG. 3b.

In FIG. 7, most of the screen attributes discussed above are providedand will not be further discussed. However, it is important to note, asmentioned above, that the keys identified in the last two lines of thescreen provide keys for switching back and forth between sites (keys 02and 04, preferably identifying "PF" keys), for panning right and leftthrough the spreadsheet (keys 10 and 11) and for printing the report toprovide a hard copy to the user (key 09).

Similarly in FIGS. 8 and 9, FIG. 9 (screen A01B) being a continuation ofFIG. 8 (screen A01), options of a historical comparison (key 06) andlist (key 11) are provided. This historical comparison is describedbelow in connection with A14 of FIG. 3k.

FIG. 3b, and FIG. 3c which follows, are a series of branching steps totest the selection made and cause branching to other parts of the ILCsystem. Specifically, the first decision block 201 selects location 1 orsite one's process flow and operational details and causes a branch toA2 of FIG. 3d. A list of the indicated process flows available fordisplay is presented, as shown at 401. This display, of which FIG. 8 isa preferable form, consists of sectors and operations. (A sector is agroup of operations and is indicated on the screen with a "*>" beginningin column one. An operation is a manufacturing step required to make theproduct as shown in screen A01 of FIG. 8.)

It should be noted that all screens of the ILC system are not limited insize and further screens, such as FIG. 9 are provided. Scrolling orpanning through data presented in either a horizontal or verticaldirection or the presentation of sequential screens is also provided ina well-understood manner for all screens of the ILC system.

As further shown in FIG. 3d, a decision block 402 is provided to selecta view of the operational details. If the user makes such a selection,the ILC system will branch to 406 which is the list of the detailoperations. As shown in FIG. 10, screen A003 (FIG. 10) consists of alist of common data items on the left part of the screen. The middlepart of the screen lists site one values for location 1 for those items.The right part of the screen lists the site two values for location 2for those same data items. The list of data items is from a table ofstandard data items which can be added to or subtracted from. If thereare no values for the data items, these items can be optionallysuppressed. There can be different lists of data items for differentkinds of process flows.

From screen A03 of FIG. 10, the user can make further selections whichare sequentially tested and corresponding branches made as illustratedin FIG. 3e, beginning at A5. A decision block 501 selects a comparisonof changes over time between the two sites at two points in time, whichthe user is prompted to enter at 504. Any two dates may be entered bythe user corresponding to the dates on which the operations will becompared. This will cause production of a display to show the comparisonfor the indicated dates. A comparison will be made between site one andsite two for the first date. Another comparison will be made between thetwo sites for the second date. The two comparisons will be displayedside-by-side with most identical lines not displayed and the changed,moved, deleted and inserted lines indicated. Once the user has viewedthis data, the ILC system returns to the view operation of FIGS. 8 and 9at 406 of FIG. 3d.

If the compare option was not selected at 501, the ILC system tests theselection to determine if a detail history option was selected at 502.If so, a list of available detail histories is displayed as indicated at506. This display, preferably a menu of the detail history, is presentedconsisting of the data, time and user-ID of the person making thechange, as shown in FIG. 12, illustrating screen A008. When a furtherselection is made, the further selection is tested and displaysgenerated as shown in FIG. 3f, beginning at A6A.

Specifically, a decision block 5A01 is provided for selecting theoperation at a point in time for site 1. A view of the history from apoint in time consisting of the items and the values for the items forthe selected site is provided as shown at 5A05. This is the list of theoperational details. As shown in FIG. 12a, this screen consists of alist of common data items on the left part of the screen. The middlepart of the screen lists site one values for location 1 for those items.The right part of the screen remains blank. After this is done, the ILCsystem returns to screen A008, shown in FIG. 12, from which furtherselections can be made.

If a history was not selected, as determined at 5A01, the selection istested for a comparison selection at 5A02. This is a decision block forselecting a comparison of the operation from any two points in time forsite 1. The user is then prompted to enter two dates at 5A06. When twodates have been entered for the historical comparison, a view of thereturned data will be provided at 5A07. This will show the comparisonfor the indicated dates. Location 1 or site one's items and values foreach date will be displayed side by side with most identical lines notdisplayed and the changed, moved, deleted and inserted lines indicated.Thereafter, the ILC system will return to 506 with a display of thedetail history lists, as before.

If a selection of a comparison of any change listed in screen A008, FIG.12, to the previous change is selected, a display of this data isprovided at 5A08. This will show the comparison to the previous changeon the list for location 1 (or site one's) items and values for eachdate will be displayed side by side with most identical lines notdisplayed and the changed, moved, deleted and inserted lines indicated.Afterward, the detail history lists are again displayed at 506, asbefore. Finally, if the selection was for the previous selection level,detected at 5A04, a return is made to the previous menu by branching toA6 and re-entering the view operations step 406 of FIG. 3d or to A15 andre-entering step 408 of FIG. 3d to view history options. The menureturned to will depend on the menu that the system came from. Earlierscreens can be reached by default of branching at 501-503 of FIG. 3ewhich causes a return to A2 of FIG. 3d and the screens of FIGS. 8 or 9.

If the selection made from the screens of FIGS. 8 or 9, preferably bymeans of a cursor, is for sectors, a branch is executed at 403 to ascreen showing a list of all of the sectors found in the process flow ofsectors at operation 407. Options within this operation are shown inFIG. 3j, beginning at A8. The select sectors operation 901 allowsselection from among all sectors that can be displayed. It should benoted for conciseness of explanation of the invention that if groups areselected (a group is a predefined list of sectors) and branching occursat 405 of FIG. 3d, the operations of FIG. 3j will be entered at A13 anda similar list of groups will be displayed at 408 to allow a similartype of selection to be made at 902. After the selection, whether ofsectors or groups, the following operations are carried out, albeit withdifferent retrieved data corresponding to the selection of eithersectors or groups. The following description of these operations, whileexpressed in terms of sectors is precisely the same as for groups,subsequent to a branch at 405 and display 409 of FIG. 3d.

After selection of a sector or a group, compared operations aredisplayed at 903 in the form of a list, illustrated in a preferred formin FIG. 10a. This list contains all of the operational details from theselected sectors or groups. It consists of a list of common data itemson the left part of the screen. The middle part of the screen listslocation 1 or site one's values for those items. The right part of thescreen lists Location 2 or site two's values for those same data items.The list of data items is from a table of standard data items which canbe added to or subtracted from. Following this display, the user canthen specify additional detail which is displayed in response to a chainof branching operations 904, 906, 907 and 908 which serve to test theselection and retrieve the desired data. As noted above, the selectionis preferably made numerically using programmable function keys such asPF1-PF12 keys generally provided on terminals. However, alternative oradditional selection arrangements for selection can be easily provided.Specifically, the user can select major problems of either an open orclosed type (open problems being in the process of resolution and closedproblems having been previously resolved, minor problems and newproblems with the manufacturing line or other business operation. Thesedisplays will also take the form of lists of items selected from thecomparison items displayed at 903. Selection can be made by testing theactual variance against a predetermined variance figure, as betweenmajor and minor problems and for particular data or time of occurrenceof a variance for closed problems and new problems, respectively. At thepresent time, selection and categorization of problems is preferablydone manually by the setting of flags which define the category ofproblem. Thereafter, all data for which flags have been set willthereafter be automatically displayed in response to operator selectionof problem category, such as from screen A057, illustrated in FIG. 19.All of these displays provide a return A10 to 903 for furtherselections. If no further selection is made, the system defaults to 909which allows the user to return to the sectors menu or the group menu atA11 or A12 of FIG. 3d. This feature is particularly useful since itenhances comparability of data regardless of whether the data involvessectors or groups and effectively allows the operations of FIG. 3j to bere-entered and repeated, at will, beginning at either A8 or A13.

If, in the screen of FIGS. 8 or 9, a history compare function isselected, a branching operation occurs at 404, causing a display ofhistory options 408. This display again is in the form of a list of thehistory options when viewing the process flow, from which the user canchoose. The options consist of the following: 1.) comparison of the twosites at a single point in time for an individual operation, 2.)comparison of the two sites at two points in time for an individualoperation, and 3.) detail history of the changes at site 1 for anindividual operation. The following operations are illustrated in FIG.3k, beginning at A14.

If the user specifies a data comparison for only a single date, a branchis carried out at 1001, the user is prompted to enter the desired dateat 1004 and a comparison history is displayed at 1005. This is the listof the operational details. It consists of a list of common data itemson the left part of the screen. The middle part of the screen listslocation 1's or site one's values for those items. The right part of thescreen lists location 2's or site two's values for those same dataitems. Similarly, if the user specifies a data comparison for two dates,a prompt for such information is made at 1006 and a display ofdifferences between the comparisons is displayed at 1007. This will makea side by side comparison of the two sites at the point in time of thefirst date. It will also make a side by side comparison of the two sitesat the point in time of the second date. The two comparisons will thenbe listed side by side to see if any changes have been made. Most of theunchanged lines will be suppressed for ease of reading and the linesthat have been changed, moved, added or deleted will be indicated. Aftereither of these displays, a return is made to A15 of FIG. 3d to allowretrieval of further historical comparison information.

If the user selects a detail history option, this selection is detectedat 1003 and a branch is made to A7 of FIG. 3e, invoking operation 506and the screen illustrated in FIG. 12 which can then be manipulated asdescribed above with reference to FIG. 3f. Default of branchingoperations 1001-1003 causes return to the screen of FIG. 8 or 9 at A2 ofFIG. 3d. If none of operations 402-405 cause branching and thus default,the system returns to the options list of FIG. 6 by re-enteringoperation 105 of FIG. 3a at A4.

Assuming the first line of the menu shown in FIG. 9 is selected as anexample of the above operation of the invention, the screen shown inFIG. 10 will be produced, providing one or more pages of detail data. Inthis case the last two lines of the display contain key identificationsfor compare (key 05), detail history (key 10) and explain (key 12),corresponding to the branching operations 501, 502 and 503,respectively. If "explain" is selected after having moved the cursor toa document number, the screen of FIG. 11 is displayed at operation 508to provide a table of contents of documentation available from the ILCsystem. Note that in the last line of this screen, further explanationis available. If "detail history" is selected the screen of FIG. 12 isproduced by operation 506. This screen provides options of comparison ofany two dates or a comparison to the previous historical record.

As shown in FIG. 3b, either of option 1 or option 2 will cause branchingto A2 of FIG. 3d and the above described operations to be carried out.The only difference between these options, displayed on the screenillustrated in FIG. 6 is the site selected for data retrieval. Selectionof option 202 will provide the same screens and options as decisionblock 201 except the data on the screens will be for the second siteselected. In this example the data will be for location 2. All of thecomparisons will be from location 2 or site two's point of view. Theprocess flow will list location 2 or site two's process flow and anyoperation comparison will have location 2 or site two in the middle ofthe screen and location 1 or site one on the right of the screen. Ofcourse, as many sites as participate in the ILC system and for whichdata exists should be provided for with a separate branching operationsuch as 201, 202 of FIG. 3b.

In a similar manner, if option 3 or option 4 is selected from the screenof FIG. 6, branching operations 203 or 204 of FIG. 3b will causebranching to B2 of FIG. 3g. In either case, similar operations will becarried out but with different data depending on whether 203 or 204causes the branch to B2 of FIG. 3g. View operation comparison operation601 corresponds to the "Line Cross Reference from Location 1's Point ofView" in screen A036 illustrated in FIG. 7. In this option the processflow between the two sites, location 1 and location 2, is compared toindicate those sectors and operations between the two sitesmanufacturing lines are the same or similar and the cases when they aredifferent. In the case where two sites produce the same product themanufacturing lines may not be entirely the same. It is an advantage tohave each site's manufacturing lines as close to identical as possible.This allows economies of scale, reduced tool and equipment costs and areduction in the cost of solving the problems associated with buildingand maintaining a manufacturing line.

The degree of difference may be more than simply having two lines withdifferent number of operations. There are conditions where one site withtwo sectors and five operations may accomplish the same thing as anothersite with one sector and four operations. This is indicated on screenA036. Furthermore, parts of an operation from one site may be found inseveral operations on the second site. There is also the case where anoperation is wholly and singularly duplicated in one operation from thesecond site. The mechanism that provides the information for displayingthe comparison is the ILC conversion table. One conversion table isneeded between each pair or set of sites that is to be compared. ScreenA036 indicates groups of operations and sectors that accomplish the samemanufactured output. The groups are indicated by dotted lines across thescreen.

More specifically, the conversion table contains information concerningthe equivalency of operations, sectors or groups thereof between siteswith regard to process flow data. Thus, when the ILC system calls forparticular data from one specified site, that call is used to access theconversion table to control retrieval of other data from anotherspecified site and locally stored as shadow data which has beenestablished as equivalent to the local data called by the ILC system.

Site selection is detected at branching operations 602 and 603 of FIG.3g. If site 1 is selected, a screen A003, illustrated in FIG. 10 will bedisplayed containing a list of the operational details at that site andwhich consists of a list of common data items on the left part of thescreen. The middle part of the screen lists location 1 or site one'svalues for those items. If there is an operation that compares on aone-for-one basis from location 2, then the right part of the screenlists location 2's or site two's values for those same data items. Thelist of data items is from a table of standard data items which can beadded to or subtracted from. There can be different lists of data itemsfor different kinds of process flows. Similarly, if the branch occurs at603, corresponding to a selection of site 2, a similar screen will bedisplayed. Again, this screen consists of a list of common data items onthe left part of the screen. However, in this case, the middle part ofthe screen lists location 2's or site two's values for those items. Ifthere is an operation that compares on a one-for-one basis from location2, then the right part of the screen lists location 1's or site one'svalues for those same data items. When there is no site selection,branching operations 602 and 603 default to A4 of FIG. 3a and the viewoptions list is again displayed by operation 105.

If selection of option 5 or 6 is detected by branching operations 205 or206, respectively, the process continues as shown in FIG. 3h but withdifferent data retrieved in accordance with the detection which causedthe branch, as described above. First, an operations list is displayedat 701. This presents a list of site one or location 1's sectors andoperations. Next to location 1's operation number is listed the secondsite's operation number if and only if there is a one-for-one comparisonbetween the two sites operation. The knowledge of this comparison isfound on the ILC conversion table. If a selection is not made, theoperation returns to the options list at A4 of FIG. 3a. If a selectionis made, a comparison is displayed at 705 which consists of a list ofcommon data items on the left part of the screen. The middle part of thescreen lists location 1's or site one's values for those items. Theright part of the screen lists location 2's or site two's values forthose same data items. The list of data items is from a table ofstandard data items which can be added to or subtracted from. There canbe different lists of data items for different kinds of process flows.This display is similar to screen A003 but with the addition of the"explain" option. Further detail information can be retrieved throughthe "explain" option detected at 708, causing display 709 ofcorresponding files which is a hyper-text function to view selectedfiles such as process documents and images referenced by the processdocuments. This option is reinvoked from within a displayed document tothe limits of the user-ID's region space by looping back to 708,allowing a sequence or hierarchy of files to be viewed, includinggraphics images.

Selection of a detail history is then detected in the same manner as at502 described above. If there is no detection of such a selection, theprocess returns to a display of the operations list at 701 for a furtherselection. Upon such a selection, a screen as illustrated in FIG. 12 isdisplayed at 706 in the same manner as at 506. Further detections ofuser selections are done at 710, 711 and 712 in the same manner asdescribed with reference to FIG. 3f, above, but with a return to adisplay of the detail history lists at operation 706. Prompt 714 anddisplays 713, 715 and 716 also correspond to similar displays describedabove with reference to FIG. 5f. If all of branching operations 710-712default, the process loops back to C2 to allow different selections.When no further selections are detected at 702, the process returns tothe options list at 105.

Branch 207 detects selection of the seventh item in screen A026,illustrated in FIG. 6. In response, a list of unmatched titles isdisplayed at operation 209. The system will use the ILC conversion tableand process all operations that are indicated to be identical. Theoperations will be compared to see if the titles are alike. Allunmatched titles will be listed. Afterward, the process returns to thescreen of FIG. 6 at 105.

If the eighth option is detected by 208, a list of operations that arefound on the first site or location 1's process flow but have not beenincluded in the ILC conversion table is displayed at operation 210. Thisfeature is useful in prompting the user or system administrator toupdate the conversion tables of the ILC system. This feature is alsopreferably provided for other sites as shown at branching operation 301and display 304 of FIG. 3c. In each case, the options menu of FIG. 6 isdisplayed after the display of options not found in the ILC conversiontable.

Selections of the tenth and eleventh options of FIG. 6, detected bybranching operations 302 and 303, cause the process to continue at E2 ofFIG. 3i. This will cause display, at 801, of a menu of the process flowhistory is presented consisting of the data, time and user-ID of theperson making the change. The screen is similar to screen A008,illustrated in FIG. 12 except it is process flow history. The remainingprocesses and displays shown in FIG. 3i are similar to those describedabove with reference to FIG. 3f; returns looping to E2 and defaultcausing the options list to again be displayed. Operation 805 provides adisplay of a view of the history from a point in time consisting of thesectors and operations. The same format as the original process flow.This is for location 1 or site one's process flow. Operation 807, aftera user prompt at 806, provides a display of a comparison for theindicated dates. Location 1's sectors and operations for each date willbe displayed side by side with most identical lines not displayed andthe changed, moved, deleted and inserted lines indicated. Operation 808provides a display of a comparison to the previous change. This is forlocation 1 or site one's process flow. For each date will be displayedside by side with most identical lines not displayed and the changed,moved, deleted and inserted lines indicated. Preferably, for referenceof the operator, a single line preceding and following each line whichhas been changed, moved deleted or inserted will be displayed with thealtered line and all other lines suppressed. However, other screenformats or forms of reference for an operator can be provided within thescope of the invention.

If no selection is made and all of the branching operations in FIGS. 3band 3c default, the main menu of FIG. 4 will be displayed as theoperations of FIG. 3a are re-entered at A9. This will also occur bybranching at 106 unless the user desires to exit the ILC system.

It should be understood that the screens shown in FIGS. 4-12 are merelyexemplary of a preferred embodiment of the invention presentlycontemplated by the inventors and that other screens or other types ofdata can be freely provided and modified in consideration of theoperation with respect to which the invention is implemented. It is alsoto be understood that the freedom with which these screens and datapresentation can be modified allows the ILC system, according to theinvention, to be modified to adapt to any management procedures whichmay be deemed desirable.

For example, with reference to FIGS. 13-20, a set of alternative screenswhich may be used at, say, location 5 are shown. FIG. 13 shows analternative form of screen A01B, shown in FIG. 9. As in FIG. 9,selection of the 02 option calls screen A003, shown in FIG. 14 which issimilar to FIG. 10, but arranged to show different parameterscorresponding to processes at site five or location 5. Similarly,selecting 04 calls a list of groups and selection 05 calls a list ofsectors. However, in this case either screen A047 (FIG. 15) or screenA054 (FIG. 16) is called, respectively.

In FIG. 16, moving the cursor to a line and pressing the PF2 key allowsthe operator to flag each of a series of sectors. Thereafter pressingthe PF4 key will dynamically generate detail displays using screen A050,shown in FIG. 18, for all sectors flagged, from the process flows. Theappearance of the flagging operation using screen A054 is illustrated inFIG. 17 in which arrows are displayed at the left margin for flaggeditems.

From the screen A050 of FIG. 18 or screen A053 of FIG. 20, selection 06(PF6) calls screen A057, shown in FIG. 19, from which further selectionscan be made as described above with respect to operations 904-912 ofFIG. 3j. Also, in screen A047, shown in FIG. 15, if the cursor is pacedon "Cold Process, Type K" and function key PF2 is pressed, screen A050,shown in FIG. 18 is presented. From screen A050 of FIG. 18, furtherselection of 06 (PF6) calls screen A057, shown in FIG. 19 in the samemanner that the screen can be reached from FIG. 18, as described above.It will be recognized that the sequence of screens described withreference to FIGS. 13-20 is also produced by the methodology disclosedwith respect to the flow chart of FIGS. 3a-3k. Further flexibility ofchoice of information to be displayed and the use of additional screenswill be evident to those skilled in the art in view of theabove-disclosed methodology. For example, at virtually any point in theprocess, an additional branching function can be provided to test foradditional operator selections and appropriate screens called containingappropriate desired data. Returns to the ILC process after any screenwill be apparent from the point in the process where such additionalselections are added in the process illustrated in FIGS. 3a-3k, such asby returning to E2 if additional selections are provided in FIG. 3h. Itshould also be understood that a sequence of further selections could beprovided in the manner illustrated in FIGS. 3e and 3f in a similarfashion.

It is to be understood that the overall ILC system is not reliant uponan identical process being carried out at all locations or sitesparticipating in the ILC system. The screens and selection options asillustrated at FIGS. 4-12 can be carried out at one or a plurality ofsites while variations such as those exemplified by FIGS. 13-20, with orwithout further selection options, could be carried out at other sites.

It is also to be understood that some minor selection such as displaycontrol functions 07, 08 and 09 of FIG. 7 (for backward and forwardprogression through a screen which is larger than the display space andfor immediate printing of any screen) have been omitted from the flowchart of FIG. 3a-3k in the interest of clarity. However, these and otherselections and control functions can be included in the system in themanner described above by providing a branching operation to test theselection and an appropriate subroutine to accomplish the function. Inthis regard, the print function is particularly useful to provide forthe viewing of a screen which is larger than the display space andwhich, if necessary, can be done in the manner of a spreadsheet, as iswell-understood in the art.

Also, to fully appreciate the invention, it should also be understoodthat to make any combination of data available in a desired format whichis deemed useful to the formulation of management decisions, it is onlynecessary to determine the operations involving any number of theapplications available on the VM system and to list them in a subroutineaccording to the language and operating system in use and modify a textscreen forming a menu and identifying the item of interest with a uniquealphanumeric identifier by which it can be retrieved and executed. By sodoing, all of the applications available on the system will be madetransparent to the user and data in the most usable contemplated formwill be retrieved on-line from an automatically updated database.

In view of the foregoing, it is seen that a database system has beenprovided which access to information used in the management ofmanufacturing lines or other business endeavors no matter how widelyseparated geographically in real time and without constraint on datacode, format or arrangements for assuring security or file integrity.The ILC system of the invention provides automatic and user-transparentaccess to data in a plurality of applications and in a plurality offorms and formats for presentation in a user-definable format for rapidassimilation thereof and provides for comparison of data between sitesand from the selective point of view of any site based on a uniformconcordance of equivalent data, regardless of the identity of individualoperations at any site.

While the invention has been described in terms of a single preferredembodiment, those skilled in the art will recognize that the inventioncan be practiced with modification within the spirit and scope of theappended claims.

Having thus described my invention, what I claim as new and desire tosecure by Letters Patent is as follows:
 1. A method of data retrievalfrom a virtual machine system including a distributed resource, saidvirtual machine system having a plurality of nodes, each said nodeincluding a plurality of applications and local storage for storing dataitems, said method comprising the steps ofstoring selected data itemsfrom said distributed resource in said local storage including updatingsaid local storage when one of a plurality of predetermined files ofsaid distributed resource is altered, displaying a menu of predetermineddata reporting options, selecting a data reporting option from saidmenu, invoking at least one of said applications in response to saidselecting of said data reporting option and selecting ones of said dataitems from said local storage in response to said step of selecting adata reporting option, selecting further data from said local storage inresponse to said selecting of data items from said local storage basedon a concordance of said data items and said selected data items fromsaid distributed resource, and reporting said data and said further datain a predetermined format corresponding to said step of selecting a datareporting option from said menu.
 2. A system for facilitating comparisonof data from at least two data sources includinga node of a networkreceiving data from at least one of said data sources and a shadow ofdata from another of said at least two data sources including means forstoring said data and said shadow of data, means for displaying a menuof functions including at least one data reporting function andselecting a function therefrom, means responsive to said selection fromsaid menu of functions for invoking at least one application at saidnode, said application including means for reporting data from saidmeans for storing said data and said shadow of data through said atleast one application, and means for selectively displaying said datareported through said at least one application.
 3. A system as recitedin claim 1, wherein said means for invoking said at least oneapplication includes means for converting said data reported from saidmeans for storing said data and said shadow of data from one data formatto another data format.
 4. A system as recited in claim 1, wherein saidmeans responsive to said selection invokes a plurality of saidapplications at said node.
 5. A system as recited in claim 1, furtherincluding means for updating data from said at least one of said datasources in said means for storing said data and said shadow of data. 6.A system as recited in claim 1, further including means for updatingsaid shadow of data from said another of said at least two data sources.7. A system as recited in claim 6, wherein said means for updating saidshadow of data from said another of said at least two data sourcesincludes means for transmitting data from said another data source tosaid node.
 8. A system as recited in claim 7, wherein said means fortransmitting said data to said node includes encryption means.
 9. Asystem as recited in claim 1, wherein said means for displaying a menuof functions and selecting a function therefrom includes means fordisplaying another menu at another level of a hierarchy of functions.10. A system as recited in claim 1, wherein said means for displaying amenu of functions and selecting a function therefrom includes means forspecifying selection of at least said data and said shadow of data in aselectable order.
 11. A system as recited in claim 10, further includingmeans for selectively establishing a display format for said display ofsaid data reported through said application.
 12. A system as recited inclaim 1, further including means for grouping data returned from saidmeans for storing said data and said shadow of data into predeterminedgroups.
 13. A system as recited in claim 12, wherein said means forgrouping data includes a look-up table.